The only reason why I do mention it is because my personal experiences with
makefiles, etc tends to be very error prone and tedious. Whereas a NANT or
ANT script tends to make cross-platform build management fairly easy. I
often move between Java on W2K, XP, LINUX PPC and LINUX Intel and have no
problem with ANT. With other build files I often have problems of certain
paths not found or compilation not supported, etc, etc.
Was just wondering that is all...
Christian Gross
At 17:10 14/09/2002 -0500, Rachel Hestilow wrote:
>I don't see any benefit to that. You're still dependent on cygwin (or
>what have you), but now you've introduced an additional build system
>into the mix. Why have two build systems when it's just as easy to use
>only makefiles?
>>On Sat, 2002-09-14 at 17:02, Christian Gross wrote:
> > Fair enough, but that is only one aspect. And NANT or ANT could deal with
> > those issues by invoking a program that executes a makefile that compiles
> > the C glue library.
> >
> > Would that complicate things?
> >
> > Christian Gross
> >
>>